|
Post by Jeddak on Jun 4, 2020 21:19:34 GMT -5
Plus there's that whole 'now I am a man' thing. I think they were making it as clear as they could in a code book at the time. Especially featuring their most famous character.
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Jun 4, 2020 22:16:47 GMT -5
New Teen Titans #14 (December 1981) "Revolution!" Script: George Pérez (plot); Marv Wolfman (plot, script) Pencils: George Pérez (breakdowns); Romeo Tanghal (finished art) Inks: Romeo Tanghal Colors: Adrienne Roy Letters: Ben Oda Grade: B+ This might be my favorite New Teen Titans adventure up to this point. It's taken Wolfman and Perez more than a year, but they've finally got their pacing down, balancing a compelling story containing multiple escalating conflicts with deep character development. I heartily. A very, very good issue. Character development, action, pacing, and art are all top-notch. I've noted that Tanghal seems to erase some of Perez's trademark detail, but in this issue we really get a lot of the detail. The tears of a clown. I think the interplay of distracting humor and pain are a great dynamic for Gar as a character. I have not read the original series though. There may be an interesting tidbit with Gar powerwise. When he's holding on to the side of Madame Rouge's flying fortress, he says he doesn't risk transforming because it may tear him, and then he stops mid-sentence. Gar's transformation always seem to be depicting as instantaneous, but this makes me wonder if there's actually a transition with the portions of his body rearranging that could mess him up anatomically if worse is applied mid-transformation. Also, I'm sure if you were saying Zandia was in Africa. The story starts in Africa, but it's mentioned that Zandia is in the Baltic Sea, so they travel pretty far in the issue. Also, a continent is pretty huge, so it's sounds weird to script the location so generally. They go to that well a lot, but I don't mind it too much. I'm so-so on my Doom Patrol knowledge (although I bought and Omnibus and might do a binge read soon), so I couldn't remember and was confused at first. But in Steve Dayton's recounting of Doom Patrol history he notes that the Chief was the leader, and I think I recall reading she was in love with him. This panel is so, so cool. The Brotherhood of Evil are so ominous and menacing. They look much more dangerous and ominous than the Fearsome Five, for instance, who I thought it was sort of difficult to portray as a threat, outside of Psimon. On one level, I would've like to have seen the Brotherhood actually defeating the Titans where we could see them in action, instead of being off-panel during the battle scene. But on the other hand, it's such a cool story-telling device and a neat trick. Again, I'm spotty on my Doom Patrol history, but I believe half of the Brotherhood were characters from the original DP run (Zahl, Rouge, Mallah (the gorilla), and the Brain), and the rest are new characters here. Also, I love the Doom Patrol history lesson. Very well done. Not too rudimentary, but not too detailed for the pacing of the story. Even though Raven is using her powers to end an imminent danger, given how she's used them in the past and how painful the story makes clear Rita's death is to Steve, it's disturbing. To me, that's a good thing for the story, because Raven works best when she's unnerving. On the other hand, it's just that she apologizes again to Wally. This seems like a call back to Raven seeing Hyperiod make Donna fall in love with him, and seeing another aspect of how harmful that manipulation is. And yet, Wally tries to tell her that she doesn't need to apologize and later compliments her skills. This is an interesting dynamic. How much of this is real admiration? How much of this is an after-effect of the manipulation? There's really more to work with for Wally in this issue. Also, I've mention, how his power level might effect how he used. Here, the threat is really big, so his inclusion helps. I don't usually give grades in my responses, but I'd give this an A- or an A.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Jun 5, 2020 0:07:13 GMT -5
Plus there's that whole 'now I am a man' thing. I think they were making it as clear as they could in a code book at the time. Especially featuring their most famous character. That can just as easily be explained away as the pain of heartbreak. The story is deliberately vague; but, it is the reader bringing the interpretation, which is why censorship rarely is effective. Readers/viewers will project their own mindset into even the most innocent things, which has led to many a witchhunt. I have had personal experience with this phenomena in 20 years of bookselling. Yes, you can infer sex, though you can just as easily infer nothing more than a bit of necking. The point is, you infer it. Inferring sexual intercourse is quite a different matter than labeling this story as "Superboy date rapes a girl." That is the same kind of hysterical label that has been used on all kinds of innocent literature and the reason we used to highlight Banned Books Month at Barnes & Noble, when I worked there. We used to highlight the ridiculous attacks on various literature, from the political to the religious, plus many an innocent children's book or beloved classic. For instance, attempts have been made to ban or remove Shel Silverstein's work, including The Giving Tree, A Light in the Attic, and Where the Sidealk Ends. Madeline L'Engle's book Many Waters was challenged because a "fictional account of Noah's Ark would confuse children." The Diary of Ann Frank was challenged because it was "depressing." Judy Blume has been challenged because she dared depict female adolescence, complete with biological changes (such as menstruation). I'm not out to start fights with anyone; but, I do think bandying around phrases like "date rape" is like playing Russian Roulette. I don't think we are in the same territory as the mental manipulation of Carol Danvers, or Alan Moore's plots that involved rape, or the torture of Black Canary in Longbow Hunters (which was often interpreted as rape). While it is possible that Cary Bates intended to imply Clark's sexual coming of age, but had to make it ambiguous, it is also just as likely that he intended to present "coming of age" of adolescence, in a form that let people decide for themselves what that meant. Superboy does go through a trial, a rite of passage, psychologically and emotionally, which exist with or without sexually. It's not a particularly thoughtful one, no; but, given his editor (not listed, but, since it's Superboy, I assume Julie Schwartz had final say) and the fact that the Superman characters were rarely allowed to act too adult, I can see where it was a tough idea to convey. I also think he was stuck between doing something more mature and following the Weisinger formula. It is not something that pops up in Bates other work; so I would hardly compare him to Jim Shooter or David Michellinie in terms of insensitivity or outright misogyny. Down the road, the Teen Titans will have a story where Robin and Starfire are definitely in bed together. It caused a minor stir at the time, though quite frankly, it had been firmly established that they were legal adults, it was depicted as a consenting (if not particularly complex) relationship and things were in silhouette. There was no mistaking what was happening there, no ambiguity.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Jun 5, 2020 5:08:18 GMT -5
Sorry, but after someone wrote a story where Superboy date-rapes a brainwashed girl, Which story was this? In DC Super-Stars Vol #12. Just to be clear, it's incredible offensive. Rape-Of-Ms-Marvel level offensive. Nobody made a big fuss about it because, well, DC Super-Stars?But don't take my word for it. 12 Horrible Superhero Comic Stories for WomenCaptain Comics: Krypton's history just as unstable as its coreAfter the story Superboy is just a little pissed with the super-teacher, but he is completely indifferent to the ordeal which the poor girl had had to endure. And please, let's not try to justify him saying things like "it was a different era!". I'm quite sure that even in the 70s brainwashing a girl so someone can take her virginity was frowned upon. And the essay "The Rape Of Ms Marvel" was published only after three years, not thirty. I doubt that in a so short time happened a radical paradigm shift regarding having sex with a woman without her full consent. (By the way, I believe that Cary Bates was probably the most misogynist Bronze-Age Superman writer. Look at how he handled the character of Faora.) ETA sorry shaxper , this is your review thread. We should move this particular discussion in an another thread?
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 5, 2020 5:38:33 GMT -5
There may be an interesting tidbit with Gar powerwise. When he's holding on to the side of Madame Rouge's flying fortress, he says he doesn't risk transforming because it may tear him, and then he stops mid-sentence. Gar's transformation always seem to be depicting as instantaneous, but this makes me wonder if there's actually a transition with the portions of his body rearranging that could mess him up anatomically if worse is applied mid-transformation. I didn't catch that, myself, but I wonder if he might have been speaking emotionally. Or, more likely, he may be speaking to the idea of going through a difficult physical change while traveling at such speeds outside of the vessel. Just seems like if it was intended in the way you're imagining, Perez would have enjoyed drawing it, and Wolfman would have enjoyed over-explaining it. Keep it up. I'm enjoying getting your takes on these issues.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 5, 2020 5:45:05 GMT -5
ETA sorry shaxper , this is your review thread. We should move this particular discussion in an another thread? Don't stop on my account. I'm finding this fascinating. And codystarbuck: These good folks have made it clear they didn't mean forceful rape. But she was not under her own power and therefore could not give consent, even if Superboy didn't know that. So I agree with how concerning this story is now that I've seen the excerpt in question. Not necessarily concerning to an audience of the time period (nor would they have considered it rape), but disturbing as heck from a modern viewpoint. And I really don't think it's debatable whether or not intercourse occurred. They've implied it as tastefully as possible, pulling away from the two as they are getting physically closer and then immediately cutting away to Ma Kent stating that Superboy didn't come home last night. I'm going to put my moderator hat on for a sec and suggest we don't get into a debate about what does and does not constitute rape, though, as that could easily offend/trigger a person if not conducted with the utmost sensitivity.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Jun 5, 2020 6:00:12 GMT -5
I'm going to put my moderator hat on for a sec and suggest we don't get into a debate about what does and does not constitute rape, though, as that could easily offend/trigger a person if not conducted with the utmost sensitivity. You are absolutely right. I just want to add that if this story had been published in one of Superman's main titles, probably a heated debate would have followed. Instead it is little more than a footnote in the character's bibliography. By the way, the encounter between Supergirl and the Super-Teacher is just little bit less offensive. But offensive nevertheless. And it was written by Cary Bates, too. I'm seeing a pattern here guys...
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jun 5, 2020 6:50:55 GMT -5
Just read the Superboy story Thanks MDG. I might be the outlier but I found it to be a sweet story. The robot teacher is a monster, to be sure. Awesome that she was the flight attendant at the end. Amazing what could be accomplished in a short story.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Jun 5, 2020 7:20:16 GMT -5
Just read the Superboy story Thanks MDG. I might be the outlier but I found it to be a sweet story. The robot teacher is a monster, to be sure. Awesome that she was the flight attendant at the end. Amazing what could be accomplished in a short story. I... dissent. Or you and me have a very different definition of "sweet". Even putting the date rape aspect aside, this girl was used as prop and terrified against her will to teach Clark some nebulous lessons. His right reaction should not have been simply saying "Don't call me Superboy", but reducing that psychopathic robot to a pile of wreckage to be sure it would no longer use poor innocents for its perverse teachings. And by the way, it's clear that the authorial intent wasn't to depict the robot as a monster, but just an example of "tough love" (Superboy does not protest in the slightest for the atrocities committed by the super-teacher).
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jun 5, 2020 7:27:28 GMT -5
Just read the Superboy story Thanks MDG . I might be the outlier but I found it to be a sweet story. The robot teacher is a monster, to be sure. Awesome that she was the flight attendant at the end. Amazing what could be accomplished in a short story. I... dissent. Or you and me have a very different definition of "sweet". Even putting the date rape aspect aside, this girl was used as prop and terrified against her will to teach Clark some nebulous lessons. His right reaction should not have been simply saying "Don't call me Superboy", but reducing that psychopathic robot to a pile of wreckage to be sure it would no longer use poor innocents for its perverse teachings. And by the way, it's clear that the authorial intent wasn't to depict the robot as a monster, but just an example of "tough love" (Superboy does not protest in the slightest for the atrocities committed by the super-teacher). You make a point, but I meant the part of the story where Superboy falls in love was sweet. Of course the actions of the Robot was slimy.
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Jun 5, 2020 7:31:46 GMT -5
I wonder if one rationale for this story was "we want to establish that Superman's not a virgin, but don't want to establish that he boinked Lois or Lana (and we can't even figure out how it would work with Lori)."
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Jun 5, 2020 7:40:13 GMT -5
I wonder if one rationale for this story was "we want to establish that Superman's not a virgin, but don't want to establish that he boinked Lois or Lana (and we can't even figure out how it would work with Lori)." You have a point. The problem was the execution. You know, the fun thing is that in theory you can kill the 90% of the X-Men with a single bullet and still they go unarmed to fight supervillains who can level a city with their powers. I mean, why Angel in his original incarnation should fight the Brotherhood Of Evil Mutants with his bare hands? What is the reasoning here? Even the English cops at least have a baton. But the English cops don't have a Comic Code Authority. Well, even Hawkman used a mace.
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Jun 5, 2020 8:18:56 GMT -5
Keep it up. I'm enjoying getting your takes on these issues. Thanks! I'm glad this thread is back. Thanks for putting together all these reviews & it helps to have so many panels pasted in to remind me about portions of the story. New Teen Titans is a series that's easy to follow in a review thread, because I think I have all the issues to around #20 of the Baxter series (vol. 2). I was missing a few, but bought what was missing when the thread started. I'm still playing catch-up because I was finishing up some other comics when the thread restarted.
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Jun 5, 2020 9:03:40 GMT -5
Just read the Superboy story Thanks MDG . I might be the outlier but I found it to be a sweet story. The robot teacher is a monster, to be sure. Awesome that she was the flight attendant at the end. Amazing what could be accomplished in a short story. I... dissent. Or you and me have a very different definition of "sweet". Even putting the date rape aspect aside, this girl was used as prop and terrified against her will to teach Clark some nebulous lessons. His right reaction should not have been simply saying "Don't call me Superboy", but reducing that psychopathic robot to a pile of wreckage to be sure it would no longer use poor innocents for its perverse teachings. And by the way, it's clear that the authorial intent wasn't to depict the robot as a monster, but just an example of "tough love" (Superboy does not protest in the slightest for the atrocities committed by the super-teacher). Right; this is the bigger problem. Throughout the story, the girl is shown as superior to Clark. First, Misty moves to town and is immediately the most popular girl in school. Clark sends her a note via Lana Lang, and soon she's stepping up to him at a sock hop, and showering him with flattery: While dancing, Clark endures a hallucinatory attack from his robot teacher: By the way, there's an anachronism in this scene. Bruce Springsteen once commented in an interview that before the Beatles, bands at school dances did not sing; they didn't even have microphones. They just played instrumentally. Cary Bates is thinking of movies he's seen about 1960s high school even though he set his story in "Another decade, best known for Elvis, Eisenhower, Edsels." Anyway, Clark faces two moral tests at the end of this story. First, he captures a trio of Sasquatches which have escaped from a passing carnival, then decides to set them free. The Robot Teacher applauds him for his moral stance. Note that Superboy is being drawn with Superman's hair curl and squarer jaw as he is a man now. The second moral test is that one of the Sasquatches seems to throw a rock which kills Misty. Superboy is tempted to kill the Sasquatch in rage but then relents. The sensible plot point now would be to reveal that Misty was just another of the Robot Teacher's illusions. The bizarre revelation that she's a kidnapped, brainwashed American teen being pimped out to Clark should have been the final moral test, leading Superboy to destroy the robot as Zaku suggests. Did this just not occur to Cary Bates? Was "illusion of Misty" the original ending but was changed in the dialogue so that Superboy had sex for real? The story begins on a mysogynistic note all its own as Jimmy Olsen ogles and comments on the buttocks of adult Misty, now a flight attendant. In the 1960s, early flight attendants were encouraged to make themselves available for traveling businessmen, to encourage repeat business. Hey waitaminute. Why would a flight from Europe to Metropolis be flying over Smallville? Wouldn't California have been a more appropriate point of origin? The original story in Adventure Comics #240 (1957, Edmond Hamilton) had two parts. First the Robot Teacher tested Superboy's control over his abilities: The second half was a stereotypical "Lana tries to prove that Clark is Superboy, but he gets the best of her" scenario.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jun 5, 2020 9:21:30 GMT -5
Ok I was wrong. The Rape of the female character was unforgivable. You can argue both of them were raped.
Maybe we SHOULD move this discussion somewhere else...
|
|